Comments on: Black Hole of Brookhaven, Redux

By: jay carter

jay carter — Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:42:40 +0000

do a search on the red shift and it explains this phenomenon well, even to someone like me with no mathematical background.

By: Black Hole of Brookhaven, Redux

Black Hole of Brookhaven, Redux — Fri, 10 Jun 2005 08:33:01 +0000

Black Hole of Brookhaven, Redux

Black Hole of Brookhav…

By: Matt McIrvin

Matt McIrvin — Sun, 22 May 2005 03:38:35 +0000

I wrote a critique of Chapline’s objection to black holes a while back (it refers to a post by Jacques Distler which is also good).

By: Tensor

Tensor — Wed, 18 May 2005 16:03:10 +0000

Zeb,
The answer to lies in determining what an observer sees. For an observer (let’s call him Ted) on the surface of the collapsing star (yeah, I know, not the best place to be) time doesn’t appear to slow down and the star collapses through the event horizon and into a black hole. Another observer (let’s call her Pam) far from the collapsing star will observe Ted’s time slowing (and light redshifting) to the point where it appears to Pam that Ted freezes at the event horizon (It also becomes impossible to see Ted at this point anyway due to the redshifting of ligth). So does Ted freeze or does he fall through the event horizon? Based on whats called a “Finklestein frame of reference” (it incorporates both Ted and Pam’s frames of reference) he does fall through and his freezing at the even horizon (as view by Pam) is an optical illusion.

By: Zeb Rice

Zeb Rice — Wed, 18 May 2005 03:16:59 +0000

I read it in Astronomy magazine, written by Bob Berman, who regularly writes a column called “Strange Universe”. I don’t remember exactly what issue it was. I know that I’ve heard about similar arguments from different people as well.

In my defense, I don’t know if its correct either, I’m just trying to pass on information. In either case, for all practical purposes, you still shouldn’t get too close to these things.

By: ZorkFox

ZorkFox — Tue, 17 May 2005 23:49:20 +0000

I’m with Irishman on this one (assuming he meant “it is IMpossible to ever…”). Anybody who’s been through a basic pre-calculus class can tell you that “paradox” garbage.
Zeb, where did you read about this?

By: Irishman

Irishman — Tue, 17 May 2005 18:29:30 +0000

And Xeno’s Paradox says it is possible to ever go through the door, because first you have to go halfway to the door, then you have to go halfway from there, then halfway from there, for infinitely smaller halves.

Methinks there just might be something wrong with the premise somewhere.